Support NeoGAF

[KingdomHeartsFan]

The issue is that you see it as 'fairyland' rather than "errors in biosynthesis of androgens, such as deficiencies of 5-α-reductase-2 and 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-3" or whatever the ACTUAL cause of the very real, non fantasy thing that it is. And then you proceed to disrespect people. Disrespecting people over their medical condition will always get you fired or otherwise attacked. The reason you don't understand why you are being 'attacked' is because you don't understand that these are medical conditions that you yourself are purposely ignoring.

Before this whole "transgender" thing, like before that word was even a thing, those people were taken seriously as a medical disorder. Now its mostly just mentally ill people that have no chemical imbalance trying to force people to live in their fairyland. The people that actually have the medical disorder now play backseat to these people. You can see the immediate change in the community, its become a gathering ground for rejects that are loud and irrational and do the people that actually have a medical disorder a great disservice.

 

[Rhysser]

Before this whole "transgender" thing, like before that word was even a thing, those people were taken seriously as a medical disorder. Now its mostly just mentally ill people that have no chemical imbalance trying to force people to live in their fairyland. The people that actually have the medical disorder now play backseat to these people. You can see the immediate change in the community, its become a gathering ground for rejects that are loud and irrational and do the people that actually have a medical disorder a great disservice.

You have no idea what is going on in anyone's head, so you are just sort of saying this by fiat, even though it actually isn't true.

Even if it were true, since you can't recognize who really does feel like they are assigned the wrong gender, and who is "faking" it - whatever this might even mean - it's probably best to make an effort to be respectful.

What actually IS true though is that before "the transgender thing" these people were being beaten and killed, rejected and thrown out by their families, etc and they continue to be so now. We are still living in a world where identifying as another gender is a huge detriment to your physical and professional health, so there is no reason for people to "fake" this.

 

[zcaa0g]

Lots of "Get off my lawn" cringe going on in here. The world will keep changing. People used to the old ways will keep complaining about how the changes will ruin all of the things. Despite this, all of the things will keep chugging along.

Gender (as opposed to biological sex) is an identity, not a biological thing. Hard idea for some to swallow, but so was the fact that the earth is not flat, or that it's not the center of the universe. All of this would upend society and destroy the world. Except it didn't. And neither will this. Progress keeps marching on. Adjust, or yell at people to get off your lawn. The future doesn't particularly care about how much you like it

"The male or female division of a species."

The definition of gender stops right there at both a common sense and scientific level.

A feeling doesn't trump scientific fact.

 

[Rhysser]

"The male or female division of a species."

The definition of gender stops right there at both a common sense and scientific level.

A feeling doesn't trump scientific fact.

I already quoted the scientific facts that disagree with you in a previous post, which links a literature-wide review article (so a review of numerous studies over many years) from the world's leading scientific publication (Nature). I highly recommend you read it since you really seem to (want to pretend to) care about scientific fact.

The summary is that science disagrees with the opinions you just posted about gender.

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

You have no idea what is going on in anyone's head, so you are just sort of saying this by fiat, even though it actually isn't true.

Even if it were true, since you can't recognize who really does feel like they are assigned the wrong gender, and who is "faking" it - whatever this might even mean - it's probably best to make an effort to be respectful.

You can be respectful it doesn't matter, if you have an opinion that only agrees 95% with these people you get attacked.

Just like recently Mario Lopez, who seems like one of the nicest guys you'll ever see, got attacked. All he said was children shouldn't have their bodies irreversibly altered when they don't even know who they are yet, a completely level headed and reasonable opinion and he got attacked.

Let me ask you then, if you don't think the community is being misrepresented by mentally ill people, then you think its actually transgender people with the medical disorder being this irrational?

 

[D-Dude]

Ow boy..

https://gamerant.com/borderlands-3-sense-of-humor-insensitive/

 

[Rhysser]

You can be respectful it doesn't matter, if you have an opinion that only agrees 95% with these people you get attacked.

Just like recently Mario Lopez, who seems like one of the nicest guys you'll ever see, got attacked. All he said was children shouldn't have their bodies irreversibly altered when they don't even know who they are yet, a completely level headed and reasonable opinion and he got attacked.

Let me ask you then, if you don't think the community is being misrepresented by mentally ill people, then you think its actually transgender people with the medical disorder being this irrational?

I don't think it's true that you mostly get attacked. I think the vast majority of people won't care if you for example make a mistake on their pronouns, and may just correct you, or probably more likely ignore it. I think this banning instance is unusual, partly driven by the fact that internet forums in gaming can be pretty toxic. Even in this instance, it is only when people are doing it "on purpose" that they get banned. I don't think it's unreasonable to shun people who are purposely disrespecting people's medical conditions.

As far as how transgender people feel about it, I obviously cannot speak for the group since it is made up of a wide variety of individuals, each with their own views. I suspect most of them just want to be able to exist and get on with their lives without being repeatedly disrespected on purpose for the various things that make them unique.

I do agree with you that in general the SJW side of this is pretty bad with trying to find offense everywhere - which is a separate issue - but it does really harm discussion and understanding. And it's unfortunate. But I think it partly stems from the fact that these marginalized groups are being attacked physically at disproportionate rates, so the SJW reaction is a sort of overprotective response because the consequences of these anti-transgender ideas is physical attacks or death. I think it's misguided even if their heart is in the right place, but maybe you can at least understand why people get attacked by the overzealous SJW mob.

 

[Sakura]

Lots of "Get off my lawn" cringe going on in here. The world will keep changing. People used to the old ways will keep complaining about how the changes will ruin all of the things. Despite this, all of the things will keep chugging along.

Gender (as opposed to biological sex) is an identity, not a biological thing. Hard idea for some to swallow, but so was the fact that the earth is not flat, or that it's not the center of the universe. All of this would upend society and destroy the world. Except it didn't. And neither will this. Progress keeps marching on. Adjust, or yell at people to get off your lawn. The future doesn't particularly care about how much you like it

It's a fucking robot. It doesn't have a medical condition. It doesn't have gender dysphoria. They want to have a non-binary character without having a non-binary character.

Furthermore, there's been plenty of times in history where new ideas or movements came along, and ended up not sticking around. This isn't a new indisputable scientific revelation discovered/explained by new technologies and equations that didn't exist before. It's an idea. Up until recently it has been largely ignorable. But as it starts to actually impact people more, be it via romance, sports, whatever, things will come to a head.

 

[BigBooper]

Even if we accept that gender and sex are completely separate and don't have that argument, why must we also accept that pronouns are only referring to the gender? Why must we call people by their gender rather than their sex?

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

I don't think it's true that you mostly get attacked. I think the vast majority of people won't care if you for example make a mistake on their pronouns, and may just correct you, or probably more likely ignore it. I think this banning instance is unusual, partly driven by the fact that internet forums in gaming can be pretty toxic. Even in this instance, it is only when people are doing it "on purpose" that they get banned. I don't think it's unreasonable to shun people who are purposely disrespecting people's medical conditions.

As far as how transgender people feel about it, I obviously cannot speak for the group since it is made up of a wide variety of individuals, each with their own views. I suspect most of them just want to be able to exist and get on with their lives without being repeatedly disrespected on purpose for the various things that make them unique.

I do agree with you that in general the SJW side of this is pretty bad with trying to find offense everywhere - which is a separate issue - but it does really harm discussion and understanding. And it's unfortunate.

I see what you mean where your trying to separate the SJW side of it, but its basically become the identity of the transgender community and it was never like this before. That's why I say they are being misrepresented by mentally ill people that are using them to push their own ideas and if you disagree with their ideas you get called a bigot and transphobic.

I saw a video of this drag queen going to libraries and reading stories and then starting teaching kids how to twerk. Anyone that had a problem with it was called a bigot and transphobic. Its basically become this shield that people can throw up in response to anything.

 

[Rhysser]

Even if we accept that gender and sex are completely separate and don't have that argument, why must we also accept that pronouns are only referring to the gender? Why must we call people by their gender rather than their sex?

You don't have to do anything. There's no reason not to accommodate such a simple request though. Being nice to people is generally a good thing. So the question you should be asking is "Why not"?

 

[BigBooper]

You don't have to do anything. There's no reason not to accommodate such a simple request though. Being nice to people is generally a good thing. So the question you should be asking is "Why not"?

Because it is not a good description and that's ultimately the main purpose of pronouns.

 

[Rhysser]

I see what you mean where your trying to separate the SJW side of it, but its basically become the identity of the transgender community and it was never like this before. That's why I say they are being misrepresented by mentally ill people that are using them to push their own ideas and if you disagree with their ideas you get called a bigot and transphobic.

I saw a video of this drag queen going to libraries and reading stories and then starting teaching kids how to twerk. Anyone that had a problem with it was called a bigot and transphobic. Its basically become this shield that people can throw up in response to anything.

The reason you see it as the identity of the transgendered community is because before SJWs propping them up they were invisible. I personally know a couple of people who struggled with these issues, and their lives are not to be envied. Even now, they are shunned by family, work, and get physically assaulted and killed at ridiculously high rates - it's an extremely difficult life. Until recently, SJWs were their only allies. It is only now that it is even starting to make it into more mainstream acceptance and we are still far from there.

Generally when these new world views come up, humans don't immediately get it right. Some people go too far in one direction, others too far in the other, and so on and so on until we find the right place and it becomes a non-issue. But this can take decades to accomplish. As transgendered people gain more mainstream acceptance you will begin to see more nuanced and differing views on these issues by different transgendered people and other progressive groups. Until then, the SJW mob are basically the only platform that have offered them any type of meaningful voice, so this why it seems that way to you.

 

[Rhysser]

Because it is not a good description and that's ultimately the main purpose of pronouns.

The purpose of things like names and pronouns is to refer to people in ways that they know you are talking to or about them. It is not about identifying if they have a penis or a vagina every time you are having a conversation with them.

Like, if i were to replace "he" with "person with a penis", does that really make sense to you as the purpose of pronouns?

Basically what's actually going on here is that it's not about biological sex. Instead, you have a sense of what a person's identity SHOULD be (perhaps based on biological sex), and want to use those pronouns, but that person disagrees with you and has their own self image, and wants you to use those pronouns. There's a disconnect, and you are choosing your perception of them vs their own perception of themselves. Seems like bad manners to me.

 

[LegendOfKage]

Ow boy..

https://gamerant.com/borderlands-3-sense-of-humor-insensitive/

John Clease: "All comedy is critical, even if you make a very inclusive joke."

Agreed, because with that criticism will always be someone on the other end of it. My guess is that the idea of not offending anyone will be inaccurate, and Borderlands 3 will happy to offend the "right" people. And depending on the targets and how they present those jokes, there's a good possibility I'll laugh.

But what in Borderlands 2 was so harmful and offensive that the developer needs to make a big showy deal of declaring how non-offensive their game will be this time? I think the answer is nothing, which makes this just another company talking about what "good people" they are, despite some very public controversies that would suggest otherwise.

 

[BigBooper]

The purpose of things like names and pronouns is to refer to people in ways that they know you are talking to or about them. It is not about identifying if they have a penis or a vagina every time you are having a conversation with them.

Like, if i were to replace "he" with "person with a penis", does that really make sense to you as the purpose of pronouns?

Basically what's actually going on here is that it's not about biological sex. Instead, you have a sense of what a person's identity SHOULD be (perhaps based on biological sex), and want to use those pronouns, but that person disagrees with you and has their own self image, and wants you to use those pronouns. There's a disconnect, and you are choosing your perception of them vs their own perception of themselves. Seems like bad manners to me.

No, I don't call someone a pronoun when I'm talking to them. They have no idea what I call them behind their back. How can that be bad manners if they have no idea what I said?

No, I'm not using my sense of what a person's identity should be. I'm using what everyone's would be if they didn't know the person.

If there is someone that is obviously a man trying to pass as a woman walking down the street, and I have to describe the person to a cop that doesn't know that person's favorite pronouns, I'm going to describe that person as almost anyone else would. A man dressed as a woman. You are twisting yourself up in knots to find a way that's offensive, but it's simply obvious that's the most accurate description.

 

[Rhysser]

No, I don't call someone a pronoun when I'm talking to them. They have no idea what I call them behind their back. How can that be bad manners if they have no idea what I said?

No, I'm not using my sense of what a person's identity should be. I'm using what everyone's would be if they didn't know the person.

I think this makes sense to do when you don't know the person. Once you do, they it doesn't.

For example, I went through a stage in life where I had long hair. People confused me with a girl all the time. So a person not knowing me thought i was a girl. Once they knew me and found out I was not, should they still keep saying "she"?

To that end, do you agree that if a person with a penis dresses and looks like what you expect a girl to look like, then the correct pronouns are also "she" since you are saying that you base it on what a person who does not know them thinks?

 

[zcaa0g]

I already quoted the scientific facts that disagree with you in a previous post, which links a literature-wide review article (so a review of numerous studies over many years) from the world's leading scientific publication (Nature). I highly recommend you read it since you really seem to (want to pretend to) care about scientific fact.

The summary is that science disagrees with the opinions you just posted about gender.

Oh, you mean the people that are funded to then come up with more bullshit to continue to get funded?
Gotcha. There is male and female and that is based on their reproductive organs, not the chemical imbalance in the brain where someone thinks they are something else than what they really are.

 

[zcaa0g]

The purpose of things like names and pronouns is to refer to people in ways that they know you are talking to or about them. It is not about identifying if they have a penis or a vagina every time you are having a conversation with them.

Like, if i were to replace "he" with "person with a penis", does that really make sense to you as the purpose of pronouns?

Basically what's actually going on here is that it's not about biological sex. Instead, you have a sense of what a person's identity SHOULD be (perhaps based on biological sex), and want to use those pronouns, but that person disagrees with you and has their own self image, and wants you to use those pronouns. There's a disconnect, and you are choosing your perception of them vs their own perception of themselves. Seems like bad manners to me.

Lying is worse than bad manners.

 

[BigBooper]

To that end, do you agree that if a person with a penis dresses and looks like what you expect a girl to look like, then the correct pronouns are also "she" since you are saying that you base it on what a person who does not know them thinks?

No, because it's still a less accurate description. What I meant by the example I gave is that even if they try to look feminine and pass as a woman, most men don't do it convincingly. It's extremely rare to see a transsexual that actually looks like the sex they are dressing as.

I run into these types of people occasionally at work and in public, and I never go out of my way to insult them. I will call them by whatever their name is and I won't call them sir or ma'am or anything like that because it's not obvious what they want to be and it's certainly not my place at work to pick irrelevant fights with people, but I won't say they have changed sexes. My view of them doesn't change based on what they act like or look like. I don't buy the narrative that pronouns don't describe sex. It's anti-science.

 

[Rhysser]

Oh, you mean the people that are funded to then come up with more bullshit to continue to get funded?
Gotcha. There is male and female and that is based on their reproductive organs, not the chemical imbalance in the brain where someone thinks they are something else than what they really are.

No, I mean endocrinologists at top research institutions publishing in top scientific publications, who across the many years have been studying hormones and development in all sorts of situations and are the actual scientists.

If you dispute Nature as a scientific source with your conspiracy theory, what "science" could you possibly be referring to as being in agreement with you anyway? A review of the complete endocrinology literature IS the science, so not sure what you could possibly be referring to.

 

[Rhysser]

No, because it's still a less accurate description. What I meant by the example I gave is that even if they try to look feminine and pass as a woman, most men don't do it convincingly. It's extremely rare to see a transsexual that actually looks like the sex they are dressing as.

What do you mean by accuracy? You keep shifting what accurate is. Before, you said it was "what someone who doesn't know the person might think". Now you are saying it's not that. What sets the correct pronoun?

I suspect you think it's biological sex. I think this is a very weird thing because you often don't actually know what someone's sex is, and you are making assumptions based on how they look, as you are not often inspecting people's genitals.

 

[Katsura]

You don't have to do anything. There's no reason not to accommodate such a simple request though. Being nice to people is generally a good thing. So the question you should be asking is "Why not"?

Because if people can just make up their own gender and pronouns, what's the point of having them at all? They become completely meaningless. Now you explain why you think that respecting transgenders involves feeding into their delusion? It's the only mental disorder where people are expected to accept their warped reality and change the meaning of words at a whim. Why is that? Shouldn't we be putting resources towards are cure instead of pretending they're something they are not?

Now, i'm going to read what you linked earlier because i highly doubt (read: i know for a fact) that you can't link to settled science

 

[EviLore]

I won't kowtow to gender pronoun compelled speech mandates for an imaginary robot. Get bent.

 

[BigBooper]

What do you mean by accuracy? You keep shifting what accurate is. Before, you said it was "what someone who doesn't know the person might think". Now you are saying it's not that. What sets the correct pronoun?

I suspect you think it's biological sex. I think this is a very weird thing because you often don't actually know what someone's sex is, and you are making assumptions based on how they look, as you are not often inspecting people's genitals.

Accurate as in most correct. I didn't say that it was most accurate if you didn't know them. I said it was most accurate because that is how you would describe them if you didn't know them.

If you have a group of people who are the sex male or female and asked a random group of people to describe them as male or female, how accurate do you think their guesses would be?

If you have a group of people that identify as the gender male or female and asked a random group of people to describe them as male or female, how accurate do you think their guesses would be?

Would you predict the first group or the second group would be more accurate?

 

[Rhysser]

Because if people can just make up their own gender and pronouns, what's the point of having them at all? They become completely meaningless. Now you explain why you think that respecting transgenders involves feeding into their delusion? It's the only mental disorder where people are expected to accept their warped reality and change the meaning of words at a whim. Why is that? Shouldn't we be putting resources towards are cure instead of pretending they're something they are not?

Now, i'm going to read what you linked earlier because i highly doubt (read: i know for a fact) that you can't link to settled science

The issue is that you think of them as "delusions". If you stop thinking of them as "delusions" then my points will make more sense to you. You bring up an interesting point about a "cure". Changing this of thing is exceedingly difficult because it often stems from changes in the brain that are permanent. E.g. the brain develops in certain ways during key development periods, because of a variety of chemicals present at the time, and once it has developed that way it is not possible to change it. It is already set.

Also a note on "cures", if someone's problems primarily stem from society persecuting them or disrespecting them, we should stop doing that. I'm not transgendered so I don't know, but if someone likes being non-binary or whatever other gender, except for the fact that society is persecuting them or disrespecting them, why subject them to something that will change that, just because YOU don't like the fact that they like how they are? Seems like it's super simple to just call them "they" and be done with it.

As far as what I linked, it's not an article that gives opinions on genders etc. It's an article that describes the various identified causes that are linked to mismatches in gender identify and biological sex. The article itself claims that in the vast majority of cases biological sex and rearing gender are aligned. But is it really surprising to you that there are biological reasons that can cause them to be misaligned?

 

[cormack12]

Despite the fact that the OP is about the banning, and the fact that I disagree with the banning facet, it is patently not the case that this is ALL people are discussing.

Nah dude. I think you're going off the deep end. You've stormed in and basically incited a very short sighted argument. You've posted very rarely since the event and it's always been in these type of threads. Before that it was mostly games, almost like you've been away on an indocitrination camp. For information, the times were 'a-changing' years ago as well (https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/third-person-gender-neutral-pronoun-thon)

'Thon', short for "that one," appeared in our Unabridged dictionary from 1934-1961. Though the word was dropped for lack of use, other gender-neutral pronouns—'they', 'their', and 'them'—remain.

Kelly Ann Sippell provided an extensive list of gender-neutral third-person singular pronouns that had been proposed over the previous hundred and fifty years. This list included, but was not limited to, hes, hiser, hem, ons, e, heer, he’er, hesh, se, heesh, herim, co, tey, per, na, en, herm, em, hir, and shey. Sippell estimated that there had been approximately 80 suggested ways of saying "him or her" or "his or hers" in a single word that was not they or theirs.

The one thing that unites almost every one of these solutions to the problem of our language’s seeming lack of an epicene third-person pronoun is that they have all failed to catch on. Note that the previous sentence used the phrase ‘almost every one,’ since there has been one proposed gender-neutral third-person pronoun which almost made it into the general vernacular. That word is thon.

Thon is thought to be a contracted form of "that one," and was coined in 1858 by Charles Crozat Converse.

The genderless pronoun sense of thon did not last as long in Merriam-Webster’s dictionaries as it had in Funk and Wagnalls, and the entry was dropped for the third edition of our Unabridged dictionary, published in 1961.

People really wanted thon to work out; the word was used in crossword puzzles for several decades, generally as the answer to the clue of “proposed genderless pronoun.”

If you find that you have need of a third-person gender-neutral pronoun, why don’t you try using the words that we describe as “well established in speech and writing, even in literary and formal contexts.” These words are familiar to us all: they, their, and them.

Language is not beholden to the whim of any group, which is why I used 'dude' specifically to address you. 'Guys' is also mostly gender neutral these days, mostly due to laziness. But there is a further issue here, in that pronouns are objective and subjective. You have to teach this language concept to five year olds and beyond - These are children, who struggle with phonetics by the way. Vernacular has some rules despite the breadth it stretches. Plus it goes against the whole gender spectrum argument; Gender is a spectrum and it's not defined because you can fall in one of any number of indeterminable positions. Except when we want to be referred to as a singular gender netrual pronoun. Then we're all the same......the paradoxical and circular idiocy these 'social issues' spawn are insane.

If you/other groups want this issue to be taken seriously then there is a path, a long path. Get it accepted as slang between the group, then try and get it formalised as a colloqualism. Then, if you're feeling edgy and brave, try and pick off one the existing gender neutral terms. If it sticks, it sticks - if it doesn't, throw it in the fucking bin with the other 80 from the last two hundred years and stop crying. Fuck me, which mad bastards use pronouns anyway except salesmen?

 

[Rhysser]

Accurate as in most correct. I didn't say that it was most accurate if you didn't know them. I said it was most accurate because that is how you would describe them if you didn't know them.

If you have a group of people who are the sex male or female and asked a random group of people to describe them as male or female, how accurate do you think their guesses would be?

If you have a group of people that identify as the gender male or female and asked a random group of people to describe them as male or female, how accurate do you think their guesses would be?

Would you predict the first group or the second group would be more accurate?

Happy to explore this but I'm not sure I understand your question. What constitutes a "correct" guess in asking someone to describe a person they don't know as as male or female?

 

[Ivellios]

Imagine your language not being native english easy ban.

These clowns.

This.

If they go through with ithese bans, a lot of people will be banned simple because they have no idea that they should call a robot "they" and not a "it" or "he/him". Damn this will never make sense to me from a grammar perspective.

I would probably get banned if i ever posted there without seeing this thread first.

 

[Rhysser]

Nah dude. I think you're going off the deep end. You've stormed in and basically incited a very short sighted argument. You've posted very rarely since the event and it's always been in these type of threads. Before that it was mostly games, almost like you've been away on an indocitrination camp.

Neat conspiracy theory, but actually the reason I am posting now is because the two forums are way one sided in each of the directions. Before I didn't have to because there was balanced viewpoints, whereas now there is just an echo chamber.

 

[Rhysser]

This.

If they go through with ithese bans, a lot of people will be banned simple because they have no idea that they should call a robot "they" and not a "it" or "he/him". Damn this will never make sense to me from a grammar perspective.

I would probably get banned if i ever posted there without seeing this thread first.

In theory it's only if you do it on purpose.

 

[Katsura]

The issue is that you think of them as "delusions". If you stop thinking of them as "delusions" then my points will make more sense to you. You bring up an interesting point about a "cure". Changing this of thing is exceedingly difficult because it often stems from changes in the brain that are permanent. E.g. the brain develops in certain ways during key development periods, because of a variety of chemicals present at the time, and once it has developed that way it is not possible to change it. It is already set.

Also a note on "cures", if someone's problems primarily stem from society persecuting them or disrespecting them, we should stop doing that. I'm not transgendered so I don't know, but if someone likes being non-binary or whatever other gender, except for the fact that society is persecuting them or disrespecting them, why subject them to something that will change that, just because YOU don't like the fact that they like how they are? Seems like it's super simple to just call them "they" and be done with it.

As far as what I linked, it's not an article that gives opinions on genders etc. It's an article that describes the various identified causes that are linked to mismatches in gender identify and biological sex. The article itself claims that in the vast majority of cases biological sex and rearing gender are aligned. But is it really surprising to you that there are biological reasons that can cause them to be misaligned?

But they are delusions. Men who think they are women are delusional. I don't state this to be mean or to disrespect them. If someone was born with a penis and y-chromosomes, they are male. If said male now states he is a female, he is delusional. This is, of course, where the attempt to redefine words come in because in recent decades we have seen a rise in the 'gender is a social construct' claim. That allows people to argue that they are not claiming they're female, they're just claiming they're women, as if that made any actual difference. Gender dysphoria is a psychiatric disorder. Whether the origin of that disorder is biological or psychological in nature has no bearing on that fact

At some point, however, the extreme left managed to fit people with gender dysphoria under the LBGT umbrella, even though it clearly does not belong there at all. This was a very clever move by them because it enabled them to equate their struggles, which are very much real, with homosexuals and make it a human rights issue rather than a medical one. The only problem is it doesn't help transgenders. Sweden, arguably one of the most progressive countries in the world, did a huge meta study a couple of years back and concluded that despite all attempts at equality, humoring pronouns, state funded reassignment surgery etc. it had almost no positive effect. That should tell anyone that we're doing a huge disservice to transgenders by focusing on all of that instead of finding a cure (by which i mean a solution which actually helps them)

As for non-binary, gender fluid blah blah - how can they have been persecuted when the concept did not exist before Tumblr? I'd argue that us as a society taking these bandwagoners seriously, hurts people with actual gender dysphoria even more

But you side stepped my question - what's the point of having pronouns and the word gender, if anyone can make up their own definition at any time?

 

[BigBooper]

Happy to explore this but I'm not sure I understand your question. What constitutes a "correct" guess in asking someone to describe a person they don't know as as male or female?

You are being purposefully obtuse and side-stepping the question because you know that you can't have a good answer for why feelings trump fact.

 

[Ivellios]

In theory it's only if you do it on purpose.

How are the mods supposed to know if someone did it on purpose or not?

I think they wont ban anyone over this in the end , otherwise they would just end banning majority of innocent members.

 

[Rhysser]

But they are delusions. Men who thinks they are women are delusional.

......

But you side stepped my question - what's the point of having pronouns and the word gender, if anyone can make up their own definition at any time?

But they are not delusions. These people don't think they have penises when they have vaginas or vice versa. They are saying that they do not identify with a particular gender, which is itself just a construct that is a part of someone's self-image, not a biological thing.

Your pronoun question isn't particularly meaningful because there isn't some pre-ordained universal purpose to pronouns or any other words. All pronouns ARE already made up. Humans made them up, humans can change them, as you can see is already happening. Humans change language all the time, otherwise there wouldn't be a myriad of languages, and subdialects of each.

As far as the point, like with all words, it is to facilitate conversation and carry information. What information that is, is up to the people having the conversation. It could be biological sex. It could be gender identity. It could be anything.

 

[Rhysser]

You are being purposefully obtuse and side-stepping the question because you know that you can't have a good answer for why feelings trump fact.

I'm really not. I tried to write a response with my evaluation of accuracy and then realized I'm not sure what is considered an accurate prediction. Is it matching the biological sex? Is it matching what a person wants to be called?

 

[Katsura]

But they are not delusions. These people don't think they have penises when they have vaginas or vice versa. They are saying that they do not identify with a particular gender, which is itself just a construct that is a part of someone's self-image, not a biological thing.

Your pronoun question isn't particularly meaningful because there isn't some pre-ordained universal purpose to pronouns or any other words. All pronouns ARE already made up. Humans made them up, humans can change them, as you can see is already happening. Humans change language all the time, otherwise there wouldn't be a myriad of languages, and subdialects of each.

As far as the point, like with all words, it is to facilitate conversation and carry information. What information that is, is up to the people having the conversation. It could be biological sex. It could be gender identity. It could be anything.

Why did you ignore most of my post? Even if you disregard the subjective analysis part, at least respond to the Swedish meta study, which pretty much concludes that your solution is not a solution at all. If you are as familiar with this subject as you let on, surely you're familiar with this study

As for the delusions - you're doing the exact thing i described in my previous post. By trying to redefine the word gender, you think you can weasel out of the fundamental issue - that your position is decidedly anti-science. It won't work

Now, finally, for the words part. Yes, humans invent words. Yes, humans change them but not so that a word can mean anything to anyone. At that point, there is no sense in even having said word. Words are invented so we can communicate but if anyone can define gender however they please, how does that word help us communicate at all? Words have value because they have definitions that people agree on. If the meaning of a word isn't agreed upon, it will only lead to miscommunication which is the exact opposite of what it's supposed to do

 

[Rhysser]

Why did you ignore most of my post? Even if you disregard the subjective analysis part, at least respond to the Swedish meta study, which pretty much concludes that your solution is not a solution at all. If you are as familiar with this subject as you let on, surely you're familiar with this study

As for the delusions - you're doing the exact thing i described in my previous post. By trying to redefine the word gender, you think you can weasel out of the fundamental issue - that your position is decidedly anti-science. It won't work

Now, finally, for the words part. Yes, humans invent words. Yes, humans change them but not so that a word can mean anything to anyone. At that point, there is no sense in even having said word. Words are invented so we can communicate but if anyone can define gender however they please, how does that word help us communicate at all? Words have value because they have definitions that people agree on. If the meaning of a word isn't agreed upon, it will only lead to miscommunication which is the exact opposite of what it's supposed to do

I don't think it helps to talk about parts of posts based on wild and inaccurate speculation hence I ignore those. E.g. "At some point the extreme left put gender dysphoria in LGBT group". This is not an interesting thing for me to comment on because it both extremely loaded and inaccurate - and a gigantic can of worms to boot, so I don't want to go down that path.

As far as redefining gender - maybe some of that is going on. But it's not actually me doing it. In scientific literature it is already defined in the way I am talking about it for at least decades. And in common language gender is now also used to describe both biological sex, but also gender identity. So the redefinition already happened, not by me. It also isn't important - I'm happy to use another word to describe a concept that is very real, since the concept itself exists.

Basically your "delusions" argument amounts to semantics. You are saying that gender and biology are semantically the same in the English language (which is not correct any more but I'll play along), and these people therefore are delusional. *I* am saying that there are cases where brains don't develop as expected and therefore a person with a penis might have a more female brain as a result. This is not a delusion . Their brain is physically different.

As a result, I want to accommodate this person if they want to be called "she", since to me their brain and its perception, and their desire for happiness seem more important than for me to pettily remind them that they have an unwanted penis between their legs at every opportunity.

As far as your last point, sure there is confusion now because it is a time of transition. This is also common. Times of transition can be trying. But don't worry, soon there won't be because pronouns will refer to gender identity and no one will be confused

 

[Mochilador]

Madness.

 

[Rhysser]

How are the mods supposed to know if someone did it on purpose or not?

I think they wont ban anyone over this in the end , otherwise they would just end banning majority of innocent members.

I have no idea, which is why it's a horrific thing to try to officially enforce. In real life, people make mistakes on pronouns even after they know, and actual transgender people are understanding of this. I would not want to be the mod trying to make this determination over the internet.

 

[DrAspirino]

So you will fight against a person who chooses what they want to be called because you think it is part of some stupid conspiracy? Classy.

Do you even know a single trans person? Do you have a clue what many have been through in their lives? Let them choose their own pronouns because it is about them, not you. Seriously why do you care so much that you'd choose to do something that disrespects someone's wishes?

Urhm...not trying to be offensive here or whatever, but aren't these discussions pointless? I mean...sure, people can choose to be called whatever they want and some people actually name objects (like ships or, in this case, robots) BUT, IIRC, there are certain rules one has to follow in language when one's addressing to a person or an object. Having said that, it's even more inconducent to even argue about gender nouns in a language that's mostly gender neutral like english.

OT: My native tongue is spanish (a heavy gendered language) and we have verbs, conjugations, nouns and adjectives that are dependant on the gender and, if my memory serves me well, even LGBT people and activists here use the gender they feel most comfortable with in our language, and apply the rules for each gender.

 

[Katsura]

I don't think it helps to talk about parts of posts based on wild and inaccurate speculation hence I ignore those. E.g. "At some point the extreme left put gender dysphoria in LGBT group". This is not an interesting thing for me to comment on because it both extremely loaded and inaccurate - and a gigantic can of worms to boot, so I don't want to go down that path.

As far as redefining gender - maybe some of that is going on. But it's not actually me doing it. In scientific literature it is already defined in the way I am talking about it for at least decades. And in common language gender is now also used to describe both biological sex, but also gender identity. So the redefinition already happened, not by me. It also isn't important - I'm happy to use another word to describe a concept that is very real, since the concept itself exists.

Basically your "delusions" argument amounts to semantics. You are saying that gender and biology are semantically the same in the English language (which is not correct any more but I'll play along), and these people therefore are delusional. *I* am saying that there are cases where brains don't develop as expected and therefore a person with a penis might have a more female brain as a result. This is not a delusion . Their brain is physically different.

As a result, I want to accommodate this person if they want to be called "she", since to me their brain and its perception, and their desire for happiness seem more important than for me to pettily remind them that they have an unwanted penis between their legs at every opportunity.

As far as your last point, sure there is confusion now because it is a time of transition. This is also common. Times of transition can be trying. But don't worry, soon there won't be because pronouns will refer to gender identity and no one will be confused

Yet again you avoided the swedish meta study. Why is that?

No, gender identity is not part of common language. You need to get out of your bubble. For the vast majority of the world's population gender means biological sex. I understand this moronic concept of gender identity is accepted in some parts of academia, among politicians and corporations looking to pander for votes or money and on social media but don't mistake that for the rest of the world

Now, you keep returning to your linked study as if it somehow supports your point but it doesn't. Many mental disorders are due to various biological factors. They are, however, still mental disorders. This goes for gender dysphoria too. Furthermore, you're arguing as if all males develop the same. All females develop the same and then you have transgenders. That is not how it works at all. There are huge variations within both sexes. It does not support your point by any stretch. Sure, you can accommodate transgenders by using their 'preferred pronouns' but if you had bothered to reply to my point about the swedish meta study, you'd realise you're actually not helping them. Also, it's a massive slippery slope. What happens when someone identifies as lord emperor and demands to be called my liege? Should we also accommodate him? Where is the line drawn? And then we haven't even touched on some of the other ridiculous things happening such as transgender males insisting on competing in women's sports despite having a massive physical advantage

As for your last paragraph - did you even read it yourself? It makes zero sense. If pronouns refer the gender identity and gender identity is what ever any given person says it is, then pronouns are meaningless. It would be like you asking me to hand you the water but instead i hand you the salt, telling you that i define water as salt. It's moronic

 

[Papa]

Despite the fact that the OP is about the banning, and the fact that I disagree with the banning facet, it is patently not the case that this is ALL people are discussing.



Nice strawman, but it's uninteresting as all strawmen are. They are only similar in that the old guard is totally fine with doing it while the new guard sees it as stupid to intentionally do it.

As far as reality, there is now a thread about a non-binary character in a video game, whereas 5 years ago that thought would seem crazy. So here we are. I'll let you figure out what is and isn't real given this.



I understand that you have this opinion, but it's just not true. In many cultures objects are gendered and yet they do not have biological sexes. Scientists also agree.

DSDs: genetics, underlying pathologies and psychosexual differentiation

Mammalian sex determination is the unique process whereby a single organ, the bipotential gonad, undergoes a developmental switch that promotes its differentiation into either a testis or an ovary. Disruptions of this complex genetic process during human ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Some excerpts:

About gender identity vs gender role:




About gender identity vs biological sex:




This is from Nature, a top-tier scientific publication. I highly recommend reading it as it discusses some of the very physical reasons why gender might not align with biological sex, including various chemical-based reasons, or reasons when biological sex itself is mixed. E.g.:



In those cases, it's just assholeish when people on this forum or elsewhere insist on calling the person by the wrong pronoun on purpose, because THEY don't believe this and that. These people often have biological differences that are causing them problems, and all people have to do is say "they" instead of she or he or whatever to make their day just a bit better, but no. Somehow this is crazy because the forumites *know better* (read: are just personally uncomfortable with the idea of non-binary) about what these people are going through and the science behind why than, you know, the actual endocrinologists who are studying these things.

That study has nothing to do with your narcissistic pronoun choice, retard. DSDs are disorders of sex development. Disorders. Surprised their use of the term “bipotential gonad” hasn’t triggered you into trying to deplatform them and get Nature to rescind the publication. You’re distorting actual science to support your New Religion when it does nothing of the sort

 

[StreetsofBeige]

By the way.

I hope everyone doesn't mind I'm going to refer to my washer and dryer, dishwasher, oven and vacuum cleaner as "she". And all the same name too - Darlene - because they are all an extension of the same robotic person. She can multitask and do all the chores.

My TV is a him though.

 

[Rhysser]

Yet again you avoided the swedish meta study. Why is that?
....

The only problem is it doesn't help transgenders. Sweden, arguably one of the most progressive countries in the world, did a huge meta study a couple of years back and concluded that despite all attempts at equality, humoring pronouns, state funded reassignment surgery etc. it had almost no positive effect. That should tell anyone that we're doing a huge disservice to transgenders by focusing on all of that instead of finding a cure (by which i mean a solution which actually helps them)

I was working on addressing it separately, typing takes a while

About this: I havent' read the study so I'm not sure exactly what they conclude and why. Maybe the reasons transgendered people weren't helped at all is because society still hates them even if a small number of them treat them well. Maybe getting a reassignment surgery isn't as helpful as they thought when their parents are still thinking of them as freaks, for example. Or maybe these efforts really have no net positive effect on them. I honestly don't know

But what I do know is that offering some sort of medical treatment is not a thing you can do easily because the brain is locked after the critical development period. I'm not transgendered so I don't know how much calling someone "they" helps. But it doesn't mean I can't call them "they", acknowledging the very real (non delusion) state they are in of having a brain that mismatches their anatomy. Me doing that doesn't somehow stop medical options from being developed.

I don't understand is why you are presenting the two things as if they are exclusive. They are not. It's possible to call people "they" and also offer them medical resources if they want them.

 

[Rhysser]

By the way.

I hope everyone doesn't mind I'm going to refer to my washer and dryer, dishwasher, oven and vacuum cleaner as "she". And all the same name too - Darlene - because they are all an extension of the same robotic person. She can multitask and do all the chores.

My TV is a him though.

Washers and dryers are neutral gendered in my native language. TVs are obviously female gendered. The oven is OBVIOUSLY a guy, so yes, I do mind.

 

[EviLore]

By the way.

I hope everyone doesn't mind I'm going to refer to my washer and dryer, dishwasher, oven and vacuum cleaner as "she". And all the same name too - Darlene - because they are all an extension of the same robotic person. She can multitask and do all the chores.

My TV is a him though.

 

[Rhysser]

That study has nothing to do with your narcissistic pronoun choice, retard. DSDs are disorders of sex development. Disorders. Surprised their use of the term “bipotential gonad” hasn’t triggered you into trying to deplatform them and get Nature to rescind the publication. You’re distorting actual science to support your New Religion when it does nothing of the sort

Yikes! Sorry the article triggered you.

 

[Katsura]

I was working on addressing it separately, typing takes a while

About this: I havent' read the study so I'm not sure exactly what they conclude and why. Maybe the reasons transgendered people weren't helped at all is because society still hates them even if a small number of them treat them well. Maybe getting a reassignment surgery isn't as helpful as they thought when their parents are still thinking of them as freaks, for example. Or maybe these efforts really have no net positive effect on them. I honestly don't know

But what I do know is that offering some sort of medical treatment is not a thing you can do easily because the brain is locked after the critical development period. I'm not transgendered so I don't know how much calling someone "they" helps. But it doesn't mean I can't call them "they", acknowledging the very real (non delusion) state they are in of having a brain that mismatches their anatomy. Me doing that doesn't somehow stop medical options from being developed.

I don't understand is why you are presenting the two things as if they are exclusive. They are not. It's possible to call people "they" and also offer them medical resources if they want them.

So then what? We force people to change or send them to reeducation camps? Or do we realise that the path we're on is not the solution? I'm picking the one science supports

You can't medicate because you're locked in after critical development? You can't be serious! Now i have to ask - what is your background? Because it seems you have very little grasp of how all of this works. Of course you can medicate successfully for mental disorders caused by development. Just look at manic depression, bipolar or attention deficit disorder. As for calling them 'they', it doesn't help them. Like, at all. Studies show this. So why are we disrupting the language in order to accommodate a tiny fraction of the population when evidence indicates it has no effect? That's insane

The reason why i think they are mutually exclusive is because you don't treat delusions, which they are since they are not the gender they claim to be unless you try to change the language, by feeding into them. Again, what if someone identifies as lord emperor and wants you to address him as my liege?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I got to say, giving inanimate objects a gender makes life less boring. Instead of it being a piece of aluminium being classified as an it, giving genders to and a supporting name makes my house more like a big family. Why call a TV a TV, when I refer to it as Brad or He?

Darlene (she)
- Washer
- Dryer
- Oven
- Dishwasher
- Vacuum cleaner

Brad (he)
- TV
- Stereo
- Game system
- Laptop
- Lawnmower
- Weed whacker
- Leaf blower
- Furnace
- Electric guitar

Adrian (he or she depending what I feel like)
- Toilet
- Fridge
- Microwave
- Toaster
- Magic Bullet
- Clock radio

They
- Copy of Borderlands 3